Traveller-digest     Sunday, September 5 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1058



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re:  Safety of low berths
Re:  standards of beauty
Re: Sailor Moon (OT)
Re: Nuclear War
Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)
Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)
re: Octagon Society
re: JG and their sectors
Re: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)
Re: The Big RED Button (was Re: The Big Button)
Re: fun with nuclear weapons!
Re: Safety of low berths...
Re: standards of beauty
Re: standards of beauty
Re: Imperal military and PR
Re: Phil McGregor
Re: AKUS MOBY Update...
World Builder Deluxe V5.2
Re: Safety of low berths...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 19:44:15 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re:  Safety of low berths

> From: Andy Coombes <coombes@bcs.org.uk>

[deletion]
> Chance of death  perception
> 1 in        12   Suicidal/almost certain death
> 1 in       100   Very dangerous (?getting struck by lightning?)
> 1 in     1,000   dangerous (?Chernobyl residents?)
> 1 in    10,000   Risky
> 1 in   100,000   Acceptable (level of risk for private air
> travel/automobile travel)
> 1 in 1,000,000   Safe (levels risk of current commercial air travel)

Thanks for the table.  I haven't seen that breakdown before (and further
reinforces Rainman's craziness:  while he wouldn't ride any airline
except Qantas, which has never had a fatal accident, he happily got into
a car made by a company that has surely experienced many fatal
accidents).

[deletion]
> So, my questions to the list are:
> 1) Is the risk of travelling low passage too high?
> 2) If so, what is a more acceptable risk?
> 3) If not, how do you justify the high levels of loss in the frozen watch
> (how do you recruit for the frozen watch), and how many passengers are
> likely to take the risks of low passage travel (and why)?

I've always thought the risk of death in low berth was way too high, and
usually rolled 1% on percentile dice -- which is actually still a very
risky proposition.  Maybe people in the Imperium are more fatalistic
about death, and just accept high risks -- but nothing else in canon of
which I'm aware supports that idea.  

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 20:00:41 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re:  standards of beauty

> From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com>

> Hm, what are standards of beauty in the 3rd imperium?  I mean, our current
> standard of beauty is nothing like what it was 400 years ago (when I'd
> have been considered one of the world's hottest babes, more's the pity...)

We sometimes discuss clothing fashion in the Imperium on the list, and
this is a related topic.  I think that there will be different, and
sometimes competing, standards of beauty in the Imperium.  Some
standards will be derived from local cultures and some from holovid
programming.

Local cultural standards will vary widely, just as they do on our one
planet today.   Different species have sufficiently different issues
about this subject that it may not make sense to talk about, e.g., what
beauty means to a Newt or a Virushi or Jgd-il-Jagd (spelling?).  These
standards will be spread around individual worlds by telecommunications
and other media, according to technological level.  Interstellar regions
will be influenced by media disseminated from influential worlds.

Entertainment, advertising, and propaganda holovids (what's the
difference?) will be made in various centers in the Imperium for wide
distribution, and they will have some effect on local standards. 
Because of the nature of interstellar communications, fashion and
standards of physical beauty will be different in different parts of the
Imperium at the same time, as the waves of holovids fan out from
whereever they are produced.

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 20:24:36 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Sailor Moon (OT)

> From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
 
> Boy, I thought most people get out of the "beautiful people are evil" stage
> when they graduate high-school. I guess I was wrong.

I think Mickey Spillane, an American author of hard-boiled detective
novels, said it best:  "Beauty is only skin deep, but ugliness goes
right to the bone."  (I can't remember the title of the novel with that
quotation; I think it's the one with Dogeron Kelly.)

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 20:41:30 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Nuclear War

> From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>

> ObTrav:  While the 3I has pretty well prevented the use of Weapons of
> Mass Destruction against civilian targets in interstellar conflicts (at
> least within the 3I), what about WMD use between nation-states on
> balkanized worlds?

What difference does it make if Imperial member states are nation-states
on a balkanized world or if they are world governments of different
planets?  The Imperial Rules of War prohibit all Imperial member states
from using weapons of mass destruction against each other.

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 20:46:14 -0700
From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <gmgoffin@pacbell.net>
Subject: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)

> From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>

> ObTrav: Just how much did Norris have to worry about this during the
> FFW? Just what was the effect on public opinion of the Battle of Terra
> in the Solomani Rim War? Given that any assault on a defended high
> population world is going to be a meat grinder like nothing else, just
> how does the Imperium deal with the PR issues?

The news generally takes a lot longer to get from the front to the
public in the Far Future (tm).  The Imperium also censors war news very
carefully.

- --Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:12:12 -0400
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com>
Subject: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)

>ObTrav: Just how much did Norris have to worry about this during the
>FFW? Just what was the effect on public opinion of the Battle of Terra
>in the Solomani Rim War? Given that any assault on a defended high
>population world is going to be a meat grinder like nothing else, just
>how does the Imperium deal with the PR issues?

I would expect this to be much less of a problem.  The family of Support
Troops from another sector would not hear casualty reports until weeks or
months after the fact. Capital won't get the news for 2 years. The citizens
who matter, the Imperial Nobles and Megacorp executives won't get the word
on casualties until the battle's over.  If the commander looses he's out. If
he wins and doesn't loose too many men or spend too much money he's a hero.
(Bringing a war in under budget was a big thing for British generals in the
1800's.)

Terry C

All that is Gold does not glitter
Not all who travel are lost

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:41:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: re: Octagon Society

Hans writes upon the TAS and The Octagon Society thusly:
>There was no connection between the two. There's an obscure, and propably
[snip]

Actually, there is a connection in the marches: The TAS has acquired some
of the OS's buildings, and turned them into hostels. (Adv3:TP)

William F. Hostman  |  "Smith & Wesson: THe original Point and Click
interface!"
Aramis 0602 C55A364-C S kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
533
Mailto:aramis@gci.net http://home.gci.net/~aramis http://www.alaska.net/~mhaa
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis	ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn- t4-- tt+ to- tg-- ru+ ge 3i+ c+ jt-() au+ st- ls
pi+() ta+ he+(-) kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:41:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: re: JG and their sectors

>> OTGH,  GDW "Decanonized" them (specifically the JG sectors) in _Atlas of
>> the Imperium_
>> At least the SM and SR sectors have had a lot of follow on developments...
>
>IIRC, it was during the MT era that GDW specifically said that
>the JG products were "not canon".  Why, I don't know. Most of them
>were better and more imaginative than the corresponding DGP stuff from
>the same area.

The sectors were thrown out in '84 with atlas. "Ley Sector and Glimmerdrift
Reaches were originally sectors published by Judges Guild. The sectors in
this atlas retain the names, but are entirely newly generated. They
effectively supercede the Judges Guild products." [GDW, _Atlas of the
Imperium_, 1984, p. 2.] During MT, IIRC, they tossed the rest (in fact,
only seeker and DGP seem to have made that transition).

In fact, the only 3rd party materials (Non-GDW) that survived the atlas
were Old Expanses and Reaver's Deep (both originally chronicled in High
Passage or Far Traveller magazines). OE was by Jim Cunningham and Gordon
Sherridan. RD was by J Andrew Kieth. "Additional data and adventures set in
Reaver's Depp sector is published by Gamelords, Ltd." [ibid.]

Interesting to note is that Leroy Guatney also recieves a credit for
atlas... [ibid.]

William F. Hostman  |  "Smith & Wesson: THe original Point and Click
interface!"
Aramis 0602 C55A364-C S kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
533
Mailto:aramis@gci.net http://home.gci.net/~aramis http://www.alaska.net/~mhaa
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis	ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn- t4-- tt+ to- tg-- ru+ ge 3i+ c+ jt-() au+ st- ls
pi+() ta+ he+(-) kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 22:02:01 -0700
From: "John Palmer" <jpalme2000@digitalsomething.com>
Subject: Re: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)

I think that the "Human Wave" approach to planetary assaults is wasteful,
expensive, and strategically dangerous.

Tactically, it's besieging a castle. The only real difference is that the
attackers hold the high ground.

They can sit outside the range of the non mobile planetary defenses. The
attackers can maintain mobility and grind slowly grind down the mobile
defenses. While chewing up the mobile defenses, they can spend the entire
time throwing asteroids, comets, and other space junk at the defenders until
they overwhelm the planetary defenses.  This would also be perfect cover for
landing various teams of commandos to take out the important infrastructure
and communication points.

Which brings up an important point, what stops ships from coming out of jump
closer to the world? I forget why.

JP

- -----Original Message-----
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Saturday, September 04, 1999 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: Imperial military and PR (was: Safety of low berths...)


>At 05:19 PM 04/09/1999 -0700, you wrote:
>>>Given that any assault on a defended high population world is going to be
a
>>meat grinder like nothing else
>>
>>Why is any assault on a defended high population world a meat grinder?
>>
>>Any defended high population world just has weaknesses. If you were
foolish
>>enough to throw your main battlefleet into the  teeth of fresh planetary
>>defenses, the assault would be a meat grinder.
>>
>>The weakness of a high population is huge infrastructure needs. Food,
water,
>>power, and sewage treatment make life possible on a high population world.
>>Destroy those items, and the population will eventually implode on itself.
A
>>simple application of Manslow's hierarchy of needs.
>>
>>A naval blockade coupled with targeted small unit commando assaults would
>>grind down the ability for the population to sustain itself. Ideal targets
>>are the highly distributed targets such as agriculture, power
distribution,
>>hydro facilities, food storage, and sewage. Even a coordinated defense
would
>>have problems getting enough firepower to defend a location before the
>>damage was done.
>>
>>Planetary assault is relatively easy, once you study it's applications.
>>
>>JP
>
>        I disagree with your analysis, given an envrionment of the 3i.
>Perhaps in my TNEC millieu (TL 9 - 11), but not the 3i.
>        Firstly, in pure TCS terms, a "hi-pop" world generates enough
>defense budget each year to have the sort of defenses that will trash your
>blockade if it gets close enough to the 100d limit to be effective.
>SDB's, BattleSats, Asteroid Monitors, etc.
>        Secondly, commando assaults suffer the same essential problem as
>your blockade does...  3i technology allows you to detect and track a
>*fighter* at 450,000km.  Deep meson sites and surface-based laser batteries
>and missile silos with access to global defense networks are simply going
to
>have a shooting gallery as you try and sneak your commando team in.  When I
>posted my "Andrew Young" design, I allowed for a *brigade* of Meteoric
>Assault Troops to be deployed at once, noting that using TL15 capsules, 30%
>losses in the air were *expected*.
>        Blockades don't work in the 3i;  not against HiPop worlds.  In
fact,
>I would venture forward the suggestion that it is the *attacker* who is
>going to be having logistics problems, not the defender.  One 20dkton TL15
>SDB that gets in amongst your support ships or troop carriers is a wolf
>amongst sheep.
>        Thirdly, *if* you can get your commando team down you certainly
>won't get them back out.  The same defense grid that somehow failed to
>notice them coming down will be *searching* for them going back out.  And
>they will die.  How many suicide missions can you send Special Forces teams
>on before some or all of the rest of your teams mutiny?
>        Fourthly, that HiPop world has the capacity to ignore your
blockade,
>should it somehow be sucessful, for months.  Perhaps years.  Eventually,
>thier allies will notice your blockade and the next thing coming out of
>jumpspace will be a Very Cranky relief fleet, not a merchant convoy.
>
>        Which means that if you want to take a planet, you have to either
>own every other refueling point within JP6, or you have to do it *FAST*
when
>you come out of jump.  Steam-roller the ships in your path, take your licks
>and attrocious casualties getting into orbit, counter-battery the
deep-meson
>sites and surface batteries, drop your MAT wave and get the attack shuttles
>with the G-Carriers and Trepidas out the doors as fast as you can.  If you
>don't take 60% casualties before having a beach head, then I would consider
>you a genius.
>        Oh, and hope the sots who own the planet are above meson-gunning
>your beach head regardless of what "friendly" casualties and destruction
>that might cause.  If they aren't, you cannot win.
>
>        --Michel
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
> Michel R. Vaillancourt misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca
> ICQ # 31172292
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
>     NET-City Communications....
>          Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
> ***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:05:00 -0500
From: "John Majer" <jsmage@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The Big RED Button (was Re: The Big Button)

> >never saw it as the aforementioned "cosmic reset switch" that everybody
in
> >their right mind did, but rather as one of the most creative and
frigtening
> >enemies that has been brought forward in a long time.  Just an issue of
POV,
> >I suppose.
>
>         My biggest problem with TNE isn't Virus.  Its that I don't use the
> 3i, and therefore the whole product was Just Another Different Rules Set
For
> Traveller.
Oh, every gamer in the whole world knows that feeling.  Imagine being a
"Gamma World" player.  Or, even worse, the hot potato of the gaming
industry, "Ars Magica."  And AD&D third editon.  Why, why, why?  Does anyone
but some confounded WOTC exec think this is a good idea?  Wait a minitue,
don't answer that, I already know the answer.
(snip)
> My only on-going concern is that I see no way to win...
Yes, but that's what makes it fun!  Daring to Dream the Impossible Dream and
all that bally-hoo.
>Virus
> is like Anthrax;  once an area is contaminated, there seems to be no way
to
> sterlize it...  even a hand-calculator could be the Agent of Doom if you
> aren't careful while scavenging.  <shrug>  You can quarentine and take
> precautions, but its there forever.

Oh, I gots some ways around this one.  Slightly left of Cannon perhaps, but
since there really isn't a Cannon so to speak, (and since what I've heard
rumored was going to be Cannon both appals and amazes me, I don't mind)
ain't got nobody that can GP me.  But only if you want to hear them.
(snip)
> >thought that playing without an empire to rebulid, an implacable foe to
> >conquor, and the intense moral complexities of just what the RC was doing
> >would be (quote) "boring as hell."
> >Oh well, still trying to convince them otherwise.
> >-J.S.
>
>         Its funny, actually.  My players don't like gaming in the 3i for
the
> same reason.  It is so well developed and so well organized, there is
> nowhere for them to make an impact...  Between the 3i Navy and the MiB
> (grin) hanging over every world like a Sword of Damocles nothing is every
> going to get big enough to be an epic. (For all you 3i junkies out there,
> please don't bother writing me volumes as to why I am wrong.  Thanks.)

Thank you for issuing the necessary caveats, Michel.  Hate for it to turn
ugly in here.
(snip)
>         Anyhoo, my point (and I do have one ;-) is that not everyone has a
> problem with TNE because of Virus.  And someone else agrees with you that
> the 3i is boring.  =)

Here's the irony, *I* don't think that 3I is boring.  Its the old
Twilight/Merc 2000 division: there are people who like the yawning expanses
that post-apoc. can bring, and there are people that like to know that their
charaters can kill people without having to worry about gathering vegtable
matter to fuel their pick-up.  It's a playstyle issue, different sorts of
motivators and themes.  I would like to getting around to playing a 3I game:
its a whole new of moral morass for the players to conquer (no, you're not
noble yet tarnished heroes working for a better tomorrow.  Your a buch of
people with a ship, no money and big bank payments.  What do you do now?)

- -J.S.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 22:44:10 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: fun with nuclear weapons!

>From: "John Majer" <jsmage@earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: fun with nuclear weapons!
...
>1) Obivous plot thread - Players arrive at world to find it in the gripps of
>a plagirized Cuban Missle Crisis.  Their objective on planet is put deeply
>at risk, allong with the populations of whatever country.  Do they do
>something about it?  If they don't it makes for a good envionmental piece,
>as well as the whole "outrun the shockwave" stuff.
...
>3) Bizzaro plot thread - What happens to a planet /after/ a massive nuclear
>war, or one that has gone on for some time (I mean, other than it getting
...

  If you run across Dragon #59 give it a look - the main article tries this.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 22:44:19 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...

>From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...
...
>I believe allied bombing raids over Germany during WWII had higher
>acceptable losses (especially the US daylight missions)?  I'm also lead to

  IIRC it was felt that losses approaching 10% per strike were going to
have really bad effects unless the accomplishments were truly amazing*.

  *and loss rates of the strike craft attacking the Japanese carriers
at Midway were how high?

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 22:48:12 -0700
From: "John Palmer" <jpalme2000@digitalsomething.com>
Subject: Re: standards of beauty

Fifth Element has some very interesting visuals for fashion and how all
sorts of styles can mix into a really cool visual. I like to reference it as
an interesting way to show fashion and style for Traveller.

JP
- -----Original Message-----
From: Jory Earl <j-man@iname.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Friday, September 03, 1999 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: standards of beauty


>Good points Kiri.  And I don't 'mull' over this.  The subject just happened
>to come up.  I too refuse to watch those types of shows (in fact there is
>darned little TV I watch at all), but not supporting such products sounds
>like a good idea.  I can live without a few things.  :)
>
>As far as the Traveller reference goes, who is to say what standard of
>beauty may be used in the 3rd Imperium?  Or that it is even human?
>___________________________________________________________
> J-Man
> ICQ# 2843475
> New Hampshire - U.S.A.
> Email : j-man@iname.com
> Home Page : http://www.geocities.com/~jman037/
>___________________________________________________________
>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 01:08:00 -0500
From: Ron Brown <ronnyq@nightowl.net>
Subject: Re: standards of beauty

I agree.  The movie offers much in terms of fachion and lifestyle, as well as a
peek at religious possibilities.  Good stuff.

BTW, does anyone have a reference or know the location of one concerning
religion in Traveller?  I am especially interested in Zhodani, Solomani, and
Vilani views.  Thanks!

John Palmer wrote:

> Fifth Element has some very interesting visuals for fashion and how all
> sorts of styles can mix into a really cool visual. I like to reference it as
> an interesting way to show fashion and style for Traveller.
>
> JP
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jory Earl <j-man@iname.com>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
> Date: Friday, September 03, 1999 3:20 PM
> Subject: Re: standards of beauty
>
> >Good points Kiri.  And I don't 'mull' over this.  The subject just happened
> >to come up.  I too refuse to watch those types of shows (in fact there is
> >darned little TV I watch at all), but not supporting such products sounds
> >like a good idea.  I can live without a few things.  :)
> >
> >As far as the Traveller reference goes, who is to say what standard of
> >beauty may be used in the 3rd Imperium?  Or that it is even human?
> >___________________________________________________________
> > J-Man
> > ICQ# 2843475
> > New Hampshire - U.S.A.
> > Email : j-man@iname.com
> > Home Page : http://www.geocities.com/~jman037/
> >___________________________________________________________
> >

- --
Ron Brown
System Administrator
Downport.com - The Traveller Domain
admin@downport.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 01:23:19 -0500
From: "John Majer" <jsmage@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Imperal military and PR

> Considering the distances involved, most people won't even care that the
> Rim war happened.  I sincerely doubt that more than one in ten could tell
> you what Sector Earth is in.  It's just not relevant.
>
> For example, my late father was from Stafford, in Devon.  I have no idea
of
> where that is in England.  None.  It was never important to me.  Change
> that scale from one generation on one planet to hundreds of light-years
> across millennia, and most people won't care.

I find your point generally valid.  OTOH, if you said "Earth" people would
say "home of the Solmani," and point in a general (and metaphorical)
diretion as to where it is.  Likewise, if you said "My Lai" they would say
"massacre" and odds on they would have a better chance pointing out Vietnam
on a map then say Sudan.  It is memory, not geography that is at stake here,
and nothing breeds memory like atrocity.  So, if the facts got out, they
might have something to say about it.  But continuing...
> Also, the Imperium controls the news feeds through the X-boat system.
They
> can massage and spin the news to their liking, and give the "official
> story" time to grow before independent witnesses make it home.  Another
> example, we are 130 years "away" from the US Civil War.  The story we were
> all feed as children was that it was about slavery.  The truth was far
more
> complex, but the "distance" and relevance to our daily lives made that
> simple story acceptable.
>
> Why should the Imperium report casualties?  Unless there's a specific
> propaganda purpose (remember the Arizona!), tell the mob that the enemy is
> being whipped.  Deaths are reported to the families, as single tragic
> incidents.  You don't tell them that their son/daughter/spore was killed
> along with 6000 of his buddies when a Solomani tac nuke went off over the
> field hospital he was in.

You know, it's funny you should bring up the Civil War issue, because it
fits in rather well.  IMHO, it was about many things, slavery included,
until A. Lincoln said with the Emancipation Proclimation, "hey everybody,
this war is about slavery!" which stood to simultainously mobilize the
moralists and African-Americans to the Union cause and turn the Confederacy
into an international paraiah.  Also in the Civil War you have incedents
like when pictures of the fields post-battle sent everybody into shock until
they were sort of unoffically banned.
So what's the Imperal Propoganda Machine like?  And what is the role of free
media?  So there's the X-boats distriubteing the offical views of
everything, and to think that the Empire is out there enforcing a standard
line to avoid potential political fallout both makes me feel good to be a
TNE player and disturbs me to think that the U.S. might be doing the same
thing.
And I accept your assertation about the value of distance in causing people
to not care about things.  But that brings up the question of the media.
Because, as you wrote earlier, the media can turn something otherwise that
the public will overlook into a topic.  Is the X-B the entirety of the
media?  Certainly they have certain...advantages so to speak, but is there
not some 'zine out there with a deceant distrubution?  Where are the
Mulders?  There are so many right and left wingers that believe in
government conspiracy in our world, and if the Imperium was intentional
holding back the truth it wouldn't be much of a theory.  What role for
muckrackers?  Or does the Imperium keep them down?  If they do, how do they
deal with it when the underground networks start distrubteing what they
don't what you to see?
I think I'm going to log off now, and work on the "All that news is fit to
print, IN YOUR FACE!!!" campaign now.
J.S.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 17:55:51 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Phil McGregor

Jeff Zeitlin wrote:

> On Fri, 3 Sep 1999 13:29:56 -0400 (EDT), "Jory Earl"
> <j-man@iname.com> wrote:
>
> >>Oh, definitely.... There were several "Phils" at the time, even. But the
> >>others made certain to include last names (Like Phil McGreggor of Space
> >>Opera and Starplay). No, Mr, K., you are NOTHIN' like the phil of whom I
> >>typed.
>
> >Whatever happened to Phil McGreggor?  He sent me all of his Starplay stuff
> >but one of the disks was corrupted.
>
> Phil still exists, and at the same email address - he's a regular
> on soc.history.what-if and alt.history.what-if, where he and John
> Freck take turns baiting each other.

As long as it is not here.

- --
Evyn...
Wish I was a better person...   with more control...
Turn the other cheek...   and when the punch comes, roll...
Wish I was a kinder person...   could see the others pain...
Not over react, not judge...   and shrug off the spreadin' stain.
Damaged, by John Shirley/Donald Roeser, BOC, Heaven Forbid 1998.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 17:58:21 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: AKUS MOBY Update...

Kurtis Rodgers wrote:

> (Damn!  That's the second time in the last month I've scewed up the subject
> line.  Double-Doh!)
>
> > Date: Fri, 03 Sep 99 20:14:38 -0500
> > From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net>
> > Subject: Re: AKUS MOBY Update...
> <snip...>
> > >The whole 'ship as an inheritance' plot element strongly reminded me
> > >of (the late, lamented) Brian Daley's Hobart Floyt & Alacrity
> > >Fitzhugh novels. Hadn't thought of those books in quite a while...,
> > >lots of good material for idea mining there.  Hmm...  :P
> >
> > No, I haven't read those books.  More material to find and read!  <g>
> <...snip>
>
> IMO, they're Brain Daley's best novels:
> _Requiem for a Ruler of Worlds_
> _Jinx on a Terran Inheritance_
> _Fall of the White Ship Avatar_
>
> Snipped Commercial URL.
>
> Highly recommended!

 Ditto, And they a plain bitch to find used.

- --
Evyn...
Wish I was a better person...   with more control...
Turn the other cheek...   and when the punch comes, roll...
Wish I was a kinder person...   could see the others pain...
Not over react, not judge...   and shrug off the spreadin' stain.
Damaged, by John Shirley/Donald Roeser, BOC, Heaven Forbid 1998.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 09:39:08 +0100
From: "Stuart Ferris" <stuart.ferris@virgin.net>
Subject: World Builder Deluxe V5.2

Version 5.2 of my World Builder Deluxe program has been released. This new
version includes the ability to generate world maps.

It can be downloaded from the following location:-

http://www.cozmos-cosmos.com/~sferris/Traveller_World_Builder_Deluxe.zip
(5.0Mb)

This will be the last release of World Builder Deluxe. A new program will be
released before the end of the year. This will build on the current features
of WBD. The new program will include the following:-

a) Amended interface.
b) Sector & Subsector maps.
c) Choice between MT WBH, TNE WTH & GURPS FI system and world generation
rules.
d) The long awaited Database option.

Stuart Ferris
stuart.ferris@virgin.net
http://freespace.virgin.net/stuart.ferris/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 20:58:11 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas E. Berry <gridlore@mindspring.com>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 1999 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: Safety of low berths...


> At 07:42 PM 9/4/1999 +1000, you wrote:
>
> >I believe allied bombing raids over Germany during WWII had higher
> >acceptable losses (especially the US daylight missions)?  I'm also lead
to
> >understand that all of the beach landings undertook during WWII had
> >acceptable losses marked higher than 20%, and again, considering all the
> >pacific landings the US made, this is an horrendous figure.
>
> It depends on the nation.  The Soviet army had plans to keep units on the
> line well past the 40% casualty level, whereas the US threshold was much
> lower.  It also depends on the mission.  If you are storming a hostile,
> fortified beach, you are going to have to accept that some units will be
> wiped out to the last man; something you would accept on a movement to
> contact situation.

Actually, that was one I had forgotten.  In some campaigns (gosh the memory
is going since I stopped researching this stuff through interest), the
soviets put the marker right up.  Thanks for reminding me of those Barry,
they slipped my mind all together, but for some reason, I never seem to
recall Soviet data like this as they worked on the "every man and woman is
expendable if there is a slight chance we will pull through" doctrine and
they went to extremes.  I once read that every major soviet action had
acceptable losses at over 60% if they could bring more troops up to hold the
terrain those losses we made on?

>
> >I also heard that US forces in Vietnam had a high ratio of acceptable
> >losses?  Although this to me is just hearsay and not read personally by
> >myself.  But I believe that in peacetime, there isn't much call for
> >"acceptable losses?"
>
> The Soviets allowed for the occasional training death as part of the
> mission.  When I was at Ft. Benning in 1985, we had a kid run in front of
a
> firing M-60.  That shut down or training for a week while everybody from
> the Battalion commander to the Criminal Investigation Division
investigated
> what had happened. (He zigged when he should have zagged.)
>

The Australian Military understands that accidents do happen, but do not
have "acceptable losses" during peace time per se (we had a Blackhawk full
of Australian SAS and the pilots die during training a couple of years ago
which was not acceptable to anyone, but the tribunal found that accidents
under these circumstances, simply do happen).

> It's a sad commentary that our leaders now have to plan on the public
> relations aspect of any military campaign.  With everyone pussy-footing
> around trying to avoid any casualties, since the Five-sided Funny Farm
> knows that the grieving families will be on the six-o'clock news,
readiness
> and skill have to suffer.
> --

Yep, yep, yep, yep...

>
> Doug Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
> Web pages temporarily unavalible
>

- -- The Roc

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1058
***********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
